It is not surprising that these "safeguards" proved as futile in Alabama as elsewhere. The obtaining of divorces was facilitated rather than hindered. The number annually granted mounts apace. In 1822 the record is not yet formidable, but the session laws show twenty-three cases in 1843, twenty-four in the next year, and not less than sixty-seven in 1849-50.[153] So it seemed necessary to appeal to organic law for a remedy. The constitution of 1865 therefore declares that absolute divorces shall only be granted by a suit in chancery; and that decrees in chancery "shall be final, unless appealed from in the manner prescribed by law, within three months" from the date of their enrolment. This section is repeated in the constitution of 1867; but in that of 1875 a different provision appears. "No special or local law," it is now declared, "shall be enacted for the benefit of individuals or corporations in cases which are or can be provided for by a general law, or where the relief sought can be given by any court" in the state.[154] From the terms of this section it may be inferred that in exceptional cases resort might still be had to the assembly. Accordingly, in 1883, by legislative decree, we find that Claudia Shaw, of Macon county, was released from the conjugal bond and constituted a _feme sole_ for all purposes whatsoever.[155] [153] For these examples see _Digest_ (1823), 256-58 (those of 1821-22); _Acts_ (1843), 143-47; _Acts_ (1843-44), 210; _Acts_ (1849-50), 517. [154] _Cf._ Const. of 1865, Art. IV, sec. 30; that of 1867, Art. IV, sec. 30; and that of 1875, Art. IV, sec. 23: POORE, _Charters_, I, 53, 65, 81. [155] _Acts_ (1882-83), 587. The history of American lawmaking in Louisiana opens with two divorce decrees passed by the legislative council of the Territory of Orleans. By the first of these acts, dated January 23, 1805, and signed by Governor Claiborne, the marriage of Captain James Stille and Lydia his wife is dissolved and each is "fully authorized" to "contract in matrimony" again whenever to either it "may seem right." This separation is allowed "in consequence of an unhappy disagreement, resulting from circumstances of an afflicting nature," which had prevented the couple from "enjoying that harmony and domestic happiness which the conjugal state was designed to produce," and leading them soon after the marriage "to resolve upon and stipulate for a complete and perpetual separation."[156] [156] _Acts Passed at the First Session of the Leg. Council of the Ter. of Orleans_ (1805), 454-56. On May 1, 1805, a divorce was granted to James Elliot and Sophia his wife: _ibid._, 456-58.